Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Kosh on January 04, 2010, 02:24:02 am
-
Of course everyone is also welcome to post what they have along with speed, although voting is mandatory.
I'll start, Althlon XP-M 2000+. All must bathe in my obsolescence..........
Limit one vote per person, if you use more than one than just pick whichever one you use the most.
-
I use an Intel Core 2 Duo E8500 "Wolfdale" running at the stock speed of 3.16 GHz. Me love Intel processors long time.
-
Pentium 4 3.0 GHz with hyperthreading. Woo 5-year-old Dell systems! :p
-
Until I can get a "Core Duo" option (without the "2"), I'm not voting. But meanwhile...
Intel Core Duo T2400 "Yonah" @ 1.83GHz. Burn!
Seriously, this laptop burns my wrists.
-
Yea pick one. I picked the Core 2 Quad. I actually use my Pentium 4 extreme 3.06ghz the most but it's over 6 years old. Shows dual processor but I think that's just because of the hyper-threading. It was pre-Pentium-D (which you forgot on the list). I've got the full list of Intel though. From Pentium 100 (still running MS-DOS 6.22) to a few P2 and P3's in the 400-500 range. An 866 (originally built for FS2). Pentium D 3.6, Couple of core2Duos and the Core2Quad. Can't remember what the file servers are running. Think one is another Pentium D 3.6 and the other a regular Pentium 4. Oh and another 866 Laptop.
-
core i5 quad
-
The non mentioned Athlon 64 3200+ which probably translates to 2.5 - 2.75 ghz
-
Pentium-D (which you forgot on the list)
Until I can get a "Core Duo" option (without the "2"),
Fix0r3d. If I missed anything else mainstream let me know.
-
AMD Phenom II X4 965 processor 3.4 GHz, 2MB L2 cache, 6MB L3 cache.
-
Since I'm taking this poll on my IBM crate...
/me has voted.
...I voted for Celeron. This ThinkCentre that I'm using to type this, which I recently increased total RAM from 256 MB to 1.99 GB, has an Intel Celeron D 331 2.66 GHz, 256 KB L2 cache, 532 MHz FSB. Intel calls it "Prescott".
My MacBook has a 2.4 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, which is capable of running almost anything that a Mac can run.
-
Core 2 Duo E8400 3.0GHz
The non mentioned Athlon 64 3200+ which probably translates to 2.5 - 2.75 ghz
That was my last one before upgrading bout year and half ago. Good times :(
-
AMD Athlon 64 X2 6000+ ( 3100 MHz )
HT@Ancalagon:~$ cat /proc/cpuinfo
processor : 0
vendor_id : AuthenticAMD
cpu family : 15
model : 107
model name : AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 6000+
stepping : 2
cpu MHz : 3100.000
cache size : 512 KB
physical id : 0
siblings : 2
core id : 0
cpu cores : 2
apicid : 0
initial apicid : 0
fpu : yes
fpu_exception : yes
cpuid level : 1
wp : yes
flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush mmx fxsr sse sse2 ht syscall nx mmxext fxsr_opt rdtscp lm 3dnowext 3dnow rep_good pni cx16 lahf_lm cmp_legacy svm extapic cr8_legacy 3dnowprefetch
bogomips : 6229.04
TLB size : 1024 4K pages
clflush size : 64
cache_alignment : 64
address sizes : 40 bits physical, 48 bits virtual
power management: ts fid vid ttp tm stc 100mhzsteps
processor : 1
vendor_id : AuthenticAMD
cpu family : 15
model : 107
model name : AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 6000+
stepping : 2
cpu MHz : 3100.000
cache size : 512 KB
physical id : 0
siblings : 2
core id : 1
cpu cores : 2
apicid : 1
initial apicid : 1
fpu : yes
fpu_exception : yes
cpuid level : 1
wp : yes
flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush mmx fxsr sse sse2 ht syscall nx mmxext fxsr_opt rdtscp lm 3dnowext 3dnow rep_good pni cx16 lahf_lm cmp_legacy svm extapic cr8_legacy 3dnowprefetch
bogomips : 6229.04
TLB size : 1024 4K pages
clflush size : 64
cache_alignment : 64
address sizes : 40 bits physical, 48 bits virtual
power management: ts fid vid ttp tm stc 100mhzsteps
-
core 2 duo E7500 @2.93 gHz, stock speed, eh? i regret still the day when i went back to intel from amd... my dear old phenom :(
-
Core 2 Duo E6600 @ 3.0 GHz
-
Core 2 Duo E8400 3.0GHz
The non mentioned Athlon 64 3200+ which probably translates to 2.5 - 2.75 ghz
That was my last one before upgrading bout year and half ago. Good times :(
bought it when the KN8 Neo was the only board on the market that could support it in the uk and its still going lol
-
Q6600000
(However many zeros it has)
2x2.66 ghz
She serves me well and her name is Tanya . . .
-
Phenom 2 x4 945 here.
-
Athlon XP 3200+ If it were dual-core, I'd be content. :doubt: Oh well.
-
in order of least suckeyness
core 2 quad q9550 @ 2.83ghz
turion 64 x2 @ 2ghz
athlon xp 3500+ @ 2.2ghz
some ancient intel mobile cpu somewhere between 1 ghz and 1.5 ghz, probibly a p3 or p4
arm7 @ 44 mhz
zilog z80 @ 6 mhz
-
Q6600000
(However many zeros it has)
2x2.66 ghz
She serves me well and her name is Tanya . . .
Could you elaborate on that? If it has two cores it's not a Q6600 but an E6600.
-
Xeon X3350 (same as Q9450 but was $50 cheaper when both came out)
MacBook Pro with a 2.53GHz Core 2 Duo
Lenovo Y550 with a Core 2 Duo T6500 @2.1 GHz
Athlon XP 2800+ in the basement
And for S&Gs, I might try to get FSO running on my P2 450 with dual Voodoo 2s in SLI (that's right, the _original_ SLI *****es)
Btw, I call shenanigans on the 3500+ XP, never was such a chip was there? I mean maybe there's a 3200+ overclocked or something, but they never sold a 3500+ XP chip I didn't think.
-
Fix0r3d. If I missed anything else mainstream let me know.
You forgot the i7. :p I have a 920 at 4.1ghz.
-
I have one of those historical original Phenoms which supposedly nobody bought. A Phenom 9950 overclocked to 3,0 GHz to be precise. It's plenty fast for everything I do.
-
Using a Core2 6600 at 2.4Ghz, should be upgrading soon though :)
-
AMD Athlon(tm) Dual Core Processor 4850e
-
Q6600000
(However many zeros it has)
2x2.66 ghz
She serves me well and her name is Tanya . . .
Could you elaborate on that? If it has two cores it's not a Q6600 but an E6600.
it's not a q6600 as that runs @ 2.4ghz
-
AMD Athlon 64 X2 6000+ ( 3100 MHz )
My last processor was 6000+ like yours, but I recall it not being 3.1GHz. Maybe it goes by powers of 2 like bytes and that means maybe you rounded off 3072 to the nearest 100. This says 3.0GHz: http://www.legitreviews.com/article/463/1/. My processor before that was the ancient Athlon 2600+ and before that was the even more ancient Pentium III 500MHz, though I looked up data on P3 before to compare it to the 6000+ and found that 500MHz is faster than a normal P3.
-
Phenom II X3 710
-
Core 2 Quad at 2.4 Ghz, great speed. Now only if I had the ram for 64-bit Windows 7, it would be excellent.
-
Fix0r3d. If I missed anything else mainstream let me know.
You forgot the i7. :p I have a 920 at 4.1ghz.
I thought that was still under the Core brand.
-
Core i7-920. Stock speeds. I'll get around to OC'ing eventually.
-
Ok, well I added the core i7
-
Btw, I call shenanigans on the 3500+ XP, never was such a chip was there? I mean maybe there's a 3200+ overclocked or something, but they never sold a 3500+ XP chip I didn't think.
maybe its not an xp, i really don't remember what it is, i just know its a single core 64 bit 2.2 ghz amd cpu with a 3500+ designation. it sucks so much i let my mom use it. its all x86(-64) to me.
-
AMD Athlon 64 X2 6000+ ( 3100 MHz )
My last processor was 6000+ like yours, but I recall it not being 3.1GHz. Maybe it goes by powers of 2 like bytes and that means maybe you rounded off 3072 to the nearest 100. This says 3.0GHz: http://www.legitreviews.com/article/463/1/. My processor before that was the ancient Athlon 2600+ and before that was the even more ancient Pentium III 500MHz, though I looked up data on P3 before to compare it to the 6000+ and found that 500MHz is faster than a normal P3.
Nothing that fancy. It's simply that there are different versions (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_AMD_Athlon_64_microprocessors) being sold with same product name. Windsor versions of Athlon 64 X2 6000+ are 3000 MHz (processor numbers ADX6000IAA6CZ and ADA6000IAA6CZ), while Brisbane version of Athlon 64 X2 6000+ is 3100 MHz ( ADV6000IAA5DO (G2) ).
Aside from clock speed difference, Windsor versions have 2x1024 KB L2-cache, while Brisbane version has 2x512KB L2-cache. So as a whole, Windsor variant would probably be the better CPU in complex tasks that require a lot of instructions to be used, while on simpler processing the Brisbane variant would be a whopping 3.33 % faster...
So yeah, the Windsor would probably be better as a whole, but the Brisbane version was pretty much the only one available at the time at decent price, and it works well enough for me. :p
-
Btw, I call shenanigans on the 3500+ XP, never was such a chip was there? I mean maybe there's a 3200+ overclocked or something, but they never sold a 3500+ XP chip I didn't think.
maybe its not an xp, i really don't remember what it is, i just know its a single core 64 bit 2.2 ghz amd cpu with a 3500+ designation. it sucks so much i let my mom use it. its all x86(-64) to me.
Then it's Athlon 64, the XP line was all 32bit only stuff.
-
Core 2 quad Q9450 2.66 GHz with 12MB L2 cache in my desktop.
Core 2 duo T6400 2 GHz in my laptop.
Athlon 64 3200+ 2 GHz in my fileserver.
-
Intel Centrino Duo (2GB RAM) with the wonderful Nvidia Go 7600. This shouldn't be bad at all, though with Vista its beat-down quite a bit...
...Don't buy computers from Best Buy. Go manufacturer direct!
-
Btw, I call shenanigans on the 3500+ XP, never was such a chip was there? I mean maybe there's a 3200+ overclocked or something, but they never sold a 3500+ XP chip I didn't think.
maybe its not an xp, i really don't remember what it is, i just know its a single core 64 bit 2.2 ghz amd cpu with a 3500+ designation. it sucks so much i let my mom use it. its all x86(-64) to me.
Then it's Athlon 64, the XP line was all 32bit only stuff.
i always did find amd's naming conventions confusing. im sure there was a time i understood them, but ive been an intel whore for the past several years and that information was no doubt erased by pot smoke and replaced by motorhead lyrics.
also it turns out that suckey intel laptop was actually a suckey amd laptop. an xp 2800+ i think.
-
Btw, I call shenanigans on the 3500+ XP, never was such a chip was there? I mean maybe there's a 3200+ overclocked or something, but they never sold a 3500+ XP chip I didn't think.
maybe its not an xp, i really don't remember what it is, i just know its a single core 64 bit 2.2 ghz amd cpu with a 3500+ designation. it sucks so much i let my mom use it. its all x86(-64) to me.
Then it's Athlon 64, the XP line was all 32bit only stuff.
i always did find amd's naming conventions confusing. im sure there was a time i understood them, but ive been an intel whore for the past several years and that information was no doubt erased by pot smoke and replaced by motorhead lyrics.
also it turns out that suckey intel laptop was actually a suckey amd laptop. an xp 2800+ i think.
If memory serves there was officially a 3500+ chip which was the 3200+ which had been stressed by AMD to make sure it could cope with 3500+ speeds (probably about 3ghz in real speed) but that was a long time ago i think around about the time I got my 64
-
Atom and ARM, I don't qualify for the list. :lol:
-
I still don't see i5 and i7 on that list
-
Atom and ARM, I don't qualify for the list. :lol:
like the zilog z80 counts, lol
no the atom would count because its more in the microprocessor arena, while the arm, usually, is used as a powerful micro-controller, though some of the older arms had early pcs based on them. nowadays arms are mostly used in pdas and phones, but still, i think its an underrated piece of silicon.
-
ok, now I see i7, but I have an i5, so that still does not help me.
-
****, i got my CPU wrong.
I've got a Q6600 QUAD core, not a dual. It's 4 X 2.40 Ghz.
Not a Dual core piece of poop.
And i can't change my vote :doubt:
-
So no one runs on a Via C7 or something like that?
-
Well, I'm running N270 on my netbook, if you're after wimpy CPUs :P
-
Oh snap!
(Literal meaning, as in a matching pair)
Me too. 3.6.10 struggles like an asthmatic ant with heavy shopping bags on my netbook. But truespace is fine. :) i've got blender which appears ok but I require comprehensive tuition before i'll touch that. How much was your course Galemp?
-
What the Hell. I went away for a few days and come back to find that I'm still the only Celeron user around here. :D
-
The celery isn't a bad processor. Although i'd say the low cost popularity of the celery is no where near where it used to be. The amd sempron is even less popular and more horrible.
I'm literally stuck with arm and atom right now. It be a while b4 i can play the scp at max settings again.
-
Why is the Sempron more horrible? My other PC used to have it as its CPU (until both D3 and FS2_Open fried my graphics card and the motherboard, taking the processor with them).
-
Why is the Sempron more horrible? My other PC used to have it as its CPU (until both D3 and FS2_Open fried my graphics card and the motherboard, taking the processor with them).
Sempron is AMDs version of the the celeron though it works at the same speed as the equivalent Athlon it has reduced instruction sets making the end result slower
-
I use an Intel Core 2 Duo E8500 "Wolfdale" running at the stock speed of 3.16 GHz. Me love Intel processors long time.
Same
-
Why is the Sempron more horrible? My other PC used to have it as its CPU (until both D3 and FS2_Open fried my graphics card and the motherboard, taking the processor with them).
Just because your computer used to be powered by a sempron doesn't elevate it's status from still being crap.
-
Is phenom II quad core 3.4Ghz, the one I have, considered one of the best?
-
STILL waiting for i5 to be added :mad: I might just not participate in this poll if I'm going to be discriminated against.
-
STILL waiting for i5 to be added :mad: I might just not participate in this poll if I'm going to be discriminated against.
i still dont see athlon 64 lol
-
Just because your computer used to be powered by a sempron doesn't elevate it's status from still being crap.
It used to be crap. Now, it's crappier than when it was crap.
-
what happened to itanium? :/
i use an i7 actually
-
Anyone here uses Intel Xeon?
-
Xeon is basically i7, only optimised for the server market. sooo, yeah :p
i'd still like to get my hands either on that or the "hexa-core" opterons :p
-
Intel > AMD
and don't start arguing that. there's no competition these days. i used to be a hardcore AMD fan, until i started seeing dual core machines running circles around my quad
-
From what I've seen in these past few years, AMD seems to get the general architectural decisions right but doesn't seem to be able to do good (compared to the competition) implementations. Intel uses strange, legacy-like architectural decisions but the implementation is light years beyond AMD's.
As for dual core machines "out-running" your quad core, it really depends on the processors CPI/frequency and how threaded the program is. I'd waged you've never ran something like Fritz which scales almost linearly to the number of cores. :P
-
Xeon is whatever they have at the time. I have a Xeon X3350, it's virtually identical to the Yorkfield Q9450 Core 2 Quad. Not an i7 at all, and actually I wouldn't even say it's optimized. They're basically the same CPU, I think they ship a different form factor heatsink designed for server motherboards because mine didn't fit.
-
Pentium Dual-Core E6300
It's a Wolfdale-2M, but I called it Core 2 Duo because I'm cool like that. And it's running at 4GHz. It's a new upgrade, actually. But at 4GHz, it's blazing fast! :)
-
Core i7 920. 4 cores with HT equals eight buckets when rendering, which is nice.
-
ahhh that's better :)
-
Core i7 920. 4 cores with HT equals eight buckets when rendering, which is nice.
I have turned off HT since it actually hurts performance in the computation programs I use, and not always by just a trivial amount.
-
As for dual core machines "out-running" your quad core, it really depends on the processors CPI/frequency and how threaded the program is. I'd waged you've never ran something like Fritz which scales almost linearly to the number of cores. :P
and you, sir, underestimate me, or what i do for a living.
I spent 2 years working for AMD, working on a team designing the 7 series northbridges... i'm well aware what processors outperform them.
-
In that case, you should tell us. :drevil:
-
From what I've seen in these past few years, AMD seems to get the general architectural decisions right but doesn't seem to be able to do good (compared to the competition) implementations. Intel uses strange, legacy-like architectural decisions but the implementation is light years beyond AMD's.
As for dual core machines "out-running" your quad core, it really depends on the processors CPI/frequency and how threaded the program is. I'd waged you've never ran something like Fritz which scales almost linearly to the number of cores. :P
AMD has had a number of implementation issues, starting with the notorious burning thunderbirds, paper launches, and the not so phenominal launch of the phenom. Combining that with its hemorreaging of cash I wonder how long it can last.
-
From what I've seen in these past few years, AMD seems to get the general architectural decisions right but doesn't seem to be able to do good (compared to the competition) implementations. Intel uses strange, legacy-like architectural decisions but the implementation is light years beyond AMD's.
As for dual core machines "out-running" your quad core, it really depends on the processors CPI/frequency and how threaded the program is. I'd waged you've never ran something like Fritz which scales almost linearly to the number of cores. :P
AMD has had a number of implementation issues, starting with the notorious burning thunderbirds, paper launches, and the not so phenominal launch of the phenom. Combining that with its hemorreaging of cash I wonder how long it can last.
AMD has always had these problems. They're getting better now, thank God.
-
I just read the other day they were originally supposed to buy nvidia (would have been a better match I think) but that fell through, and since they had already borrowed the cash they had to buy Ati instead. Not sure how true that is, but at least it makes a little more sense to me now. Both Ati and AMD went downhill after that merger for a while.
-
Necro.
I just voted again. No longer tied down to atom on eeepc or the arm in my zipit z2 (the $50 laptop that runs debian now in the palm of my hand).
I just got my new amd athlon 2 X2 2.9ghz and geforce gts 250 (yay, nvidia finally integrated physx on the damn card, ati did something similar too) off the ground. It's nice for the first time in my life using the latest technology for once, and i actually have some games to give the system a little bit of stress. Although unreal tournament 2007 has the boxed mouse crap in wine, and that leaves the fso.
The only thing old about my computer really is the ide hard drive. The motherboard only has one ide channel used for the dvd burner, and a pci add in card that has two ide channels used for the 200gb never used maxtor :)
Running linux mint (but waiting for mepis 8.5), everything's damn skippy with the latest of fso. Quake 4 at ultra settings is rather dull, it doesn't look much better than high quality (but ultra requires 500mb or more of graphics memory, and quake 4 sucks).
I do like AMD better than intel nowadays. Intel was really slow on the uptake of the 64 bit architecture for consumer grade pc's while amd implemented it first among other things incorporating and onboard memory controller, putting out the first x86 dual core processor, and implementation of direct connect architecture being hyper transport. AMD is a little slower, but i like the innovation.
-
Xeon with 2 x 2.40 GHz CPU. :(
-
Still better than anything I have, though.
-
Q6600, quad core.
supposed to run at 2.4ghz, mine is running stable at 3.6 with no extra cooling.
-
Core 2 Duo E4600, clocked at 2.4 GHz.
Whoo for being in the middle.
-
Another thing i discovered about the AMD processor i use is that it's actually a quad core, but with two of the cores disabled, among no L3 cache, but it's the same thing as the phenom II. In fact all of their current processors are just redone phenoms.
So, in other words, people who have bought certain really cheap semprons have been able to turn them into dual core athlon 2's. People who have bought certain athlon 2's have been able to turn them into phenom II's quad core.
The unlocking process is really easy, you just need to turn on advanced clock calibration in the bios. I'm able to do this, but technically i have a variant of the athlon 2 dual core called regor that most likely wont be able to be unlocked into a quad core. But, i figured i might as well try since there is nothing for me to lose.
There is a way to know if you do have an AMD that can be unlocked, it's called find out which processor you actually have.
-
Mobile Core 2 Duo T5800 running at 2.00 GHz normally. I may be upgrading to a better duo or Q9000 quad core sooner or later.
-
Athlon X2 5600+ @3.2 ghz
-
Nope turns out that my processor is 4 cores, but in a native dual core design. The native dual core slight redesign means i'll never be able to activate the other two cores. Advanced clock calibration enablement has done nothing for me.
-
E6600. God, that processor was so awesome at the time - Great performance. Gonna move to an I7-based system now, probably with an I7 930 processor.
-
You have fun with yet another intel core 2 duo/quad/or more re-release. It's the one reason why i just stuck with my intel core 2 duo laptop when i had one, and was very unexcited about the release of the core i7 and so on.
-
If the i7 was octo-core, I would be excited, but as it turns out, it's going to be quad-core with HT, so yeah. :rolleyes:
-
Everyone keeps stacking on more and more cores. It gets old after a while.
-
I just realized, in 20 years we are going to have hundred(s) core processors.
-
How small will they be by then? :eek:
-
Processor die sizes keep shrinking down at very rapid rate. This is great for less electricity consumption and heat output as well as being able to shove more processors onto a chip.
Manufacturers have currently gotten stuff down to 35nanometers. At the end of the next 5 years or a little bit sooner we ought to get down to 1nanometer sizes.
-
I don't think my excuse for a brain can comprehend how small a nanometer is... :nervous:
-
Intel Core 2 Duo 4300 running at the stock 1.8ghz and under load at 54 degrees.
-
Core 2 Quad Q9650 (3GHz)
-
Here's a question for the more technically-minded out there: at what point does the addition of more cores become pretty much superfluous for anything but extremely high-end rendering/graphics work and the like? When I was helping my family buy a new Dell a year or so ago, I had the option of getting a Core 2 Quad, but I decided to save the $100 or so and go with a Core 2 Duo because I figured that anything more would pretty much be a waste...and indeed, the system runs so fast while performing daily tasks that I feel like I made the right decision. Are there really all that many applications out there that can fully take advantage of four or more cores, and would they garner that much of a speed boost for more mundane activities?
-
Two cores is good enough for most purposes. There are a handful of games out there that benefit from more (FSX, SupCom, WoW, GTA4 are a few I can think of), but the vast majority don't, especially FPSs. A single core is enough for basic office/internet programs, but anything sold today has at least two cores so that is realistically the minimum.
Even many computation programs that are ideally suited for multiple cores have a hard time using more than two. I have almost never seen Mathematica or Matlab use more than two cores with the built-in functions, and usually it's only one core.
-
I always like two cores or at least HT cause then runaway processes can't freeze your whole system by going 100%. They just sit at 50 until I kill them.
-
jr2 made a very valid point. There was this one time when my school computers were infected with the username virus. However, because the older computers had dual cores on HT, and the newer ones had quad cores on HT, the virus only succeeded in holding up half of one of the CPUs. In other words, it had almost no effect on system performance whatsoever.
-
Hmm, that is a good point. I guess I've noticed the same thing on my machine, since I'm running a P4 3.0 GHz with HT. My system comes to what's essentially a complete stop when something goes haywire, but I'm just about always able to recover. Two cores would definitely be even better in that regard.
-
jr2 made a very valid point. There was this one time when my school computers were infected with the username virus. However, because the older computers had dual cores on HT, and the newer ones had quad cores on HT, the virus only succeeded in holding up half of one of the CPUs. In other words, it had almost no effect on system performance whatsoever.
Wait, what?
Older computers with dual cores and HT? What processor?
And the new ones are Core i7? What kind of school do you go to?
-
The older computers had Intel Core Duos, if I remember correctly. The newer ones have quad-core Intel Xeons.
-
Core Duos don't have HT.
-
Like I said, my memory has its failings. I know they had HT enabled, and I know I saw the word "Core" on the top of the case, so if Core Duos don't have HT, it should then be Core 2 Duos.
-
jr2 made a very valid point. There was this one time when my school computers were infected with the username virus. However, because the older computers had dual cores on HT, and the newer ones had quad cores on HT, the virus only succeeded in holding up half of one of the CPUs. In other words, it had almost no effect on system performance whatsoever.
Wait a minute, schools have up to date computers now? Can't be true........ :p
-
Only the last few Pentium 4 and the Core i7/i5/i3 (not all of them though) have HT.
-
Wait a minute, schools have up to date computers now? Can't be true........ :p
Bear in mind that I'm in a film and media school. We need up-to-date computer hardware and software in the world in order to keep up with the film industry.
-
Oh, so it's a private school?
When I graduated from high school in 2003, half of our PCs were donated late model Pentium MMX's and early "Klamath" model Pentium 2's, of course they maxed out the ram to a whopping 128 MB to make windows XP barely work on them.
-
Oh, so it's a private school?
It's not a private school. It's one (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ngee_Ann_Polytechnic#School_of_Film_and_Media_Studies) of eight public schools in a public institute (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ngee_Ann_Polytechnic). However, it is owned by a non-profit company (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ngee_Ann_Kongsi) in Singapore, which spends 25% of its annual profits on the school.
-
Good stuff to hear kosh. Why bother upgrading them to xp, what a waste of money the school put into those old ****ers. Just leave 98 on there! Although i bet the hard drives in those computers were so old as to just give up the ghost at some point in 2003.
Then again, the one thing in the world that haunts me till today is those horrible looking dell clamshell desktop pentium 4 machines.
They're always on the floor!
Never put any computers on the floor.
They're always dirty as hell!
Because of the fact that they're on the floor all the time which makes the psu fan a little vacuum cleaner (i'd be happier if these computers weren't bagless).
They always looked like ****!
They had a great color scheme going on, but it looked cheapie, and it was. That's if anyone managed to not break the case opening or closing it with those ****ty tabs.
(http://www.yoolight.fr/lexique-internet/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/dell-dimension-8300_open.jpg)
The people who use these computers are usually those who just know how to check email and use a word processor along with a spreadsheet program. I keep putting the desktop on the desk and hooking it up right telling them that this will prevent the problems of the computer overheating from sucking in constant dust that turns into mounds all over heatsinks and instead insulates. I come back a week later because there mouse isn't working. Lo and behold to find out that they moved the computer back to the floor, despite how much unused desk space there was. They forgot to plug in their mouse. And i come back a month later to clean the dust bunnies out again with them begging me if there is a way to prevent the dust causing overheating problem from ever happening again. Usual ineptitude for most of the people with these computers at my old college tech support/systems administration job.
I hate them damn dell p4 clamshell desktops, what was even worse was the mini tower clamshells. Even more fragile, and had they sucked at expelling heat, but in fact did a great job overheating itself from how tiny dell shouldn't have made a desktop. It drives me bat**** insane. What's even worse is that these dell p4 clamshell desktops are sure to still be in use for a good long time in the future. And the cycle will continue.
-
Good stuff to hear kosh. Why bother upgrading them to xp, what a waste of money the school put into those old ****ers. Just leave 98 on there! Although i bet the hard drives in those computers were so old as to just give up the ghost at some point in 2003.
Then again, the one thing in the world that haunts me till today is those horrible looking dell clamshell desktop pentium 4 machines.
They're always on the floor!
Never put any computers on the floor.
They're always dirty as hell!
Because of the fact that they're on the floor all the time which makes the psu fan a little vacuum cleaner (i'd be happier if these computers weren't bagless).
They always looked like ****!
They had a great color scheme going on, but it looked cheapie, and it was. That's if anyone managed to not break the case opening or closing it with those ****ty tabs.
<img>
The people who use these computers are usually those who just know how to check email and use a word processor along with a spreadsheet program. I keep putting the desktop on the desk and hooking it up right telling them that this will prevent the problems of the computer overheating from sucking in constant dust that turns into mounds all over heatsinks and instead insulates. I come back a week later because there mouse isn't working. Lo and behold to find out that they moved the computer back to the floor, despite how much unused desk space there was. They forgot to plug in their mouse. And i come back a month later to clean the dust bunnies out again with them begging me if there is a way to prevent the dust causing overheating problem from ever happening again. Usual ineptitude for most of the people with these computers at my old college tech support/systems administration job.
I hate them damn dell p4 clamshell desktops, what was even worse was the mini tower clamshells. Even more fragile, and had they sucked at expelling heat, but in fact did a great job overheating itself from how tiny dell shouldn't have made a desktop. It drives me bat**** insane. What's even worse is that these dell p4 clamshell desktops are sure to still be in use for a good long time in the future. And the cycle will continue.
Agreed. Plus they die slowly. We thought we had a hard drive problem in one and it's now gone through both myself and my uncle trying to fix my stepdad's. Random crashes and all, very reminiscent of a bad hard drive... except apparently it's not.
By the way; the ultimate solution could/would be to CHARGE THEM FOR SERVICE. :P And TELL them that having it on the floor will clog it with dust, so they either put it up on the desk or have to clean a LOT to keep it from overheating.
-
Good stuff to hear kosh. Why bother upgrading them to xp, what a waste of money the school put into those old ****ers. Just leave 98 on there! Although i bet the hard drives in those computers were so old as to just give up the ghost at some point in 2003.
It's because of liscensing. The school bought the liscence for XP "in bulk", since half of the PC's were much more up to date (P3's) than those. The old PC's were most likely donated, and broke down constantly. Personally I felt the ideal OS choice was NT 4.0, but you have to use what you have. I volunteered time in the second half of my senior year to repair them. Man, every day I would go around and find yet another one of them isn't working, either it had an intermittant motherboard, stupid kids magnetizing the monitors (all monitors were CRT), stupid kids stealing RAM (until the cases were locked), the occational dead part.
I also checked out donated PC's for use in some of the offices and classrooms, most of it was old but we ended up with some interesting things sometimes, like a pair of HP Kayak workstations (early P2's but with SCSI hard drives), something old with a very old PCI FireGL, and even a then early model P4. More than a few donated PC's were early Pentium one's (pre-MMX). One time I was also called in to install a new printer for the Sherrif Deputy's computer. Given that he was running a then fantastically obsolete win95 laptop it's no surprise he was having trouble.
-
Agreed. Plus they die slowly. We thought we had a hard drive problem in one and it's now gone through both myself and my uncle trying to fix my stepdad's. Random crashes and all, very reminiscent of a bad hard drive... except apparently it's not.
Try memtest86+, then try replacing the PSU.
-
Memory could fail tests because of power issues, FYI, even if the memory itself is good. So if you can check the voltages reported by your motherboard somehow, ideally under load (Prime95 or the like, or some other benchmark test running would do the trick) you may be able to rule the PSU out before the ram. PSU monitoring isn't an exact science though, so try to be as thorough as you can. Maybe test a suspect PSU in another box even.
-
AMD Athlon II X4 630, Quad-core 2.8GHz. 64-bit processor, but I run FS2_Open under 32-bit Linux. I mainly use 64-bit for video editing and 3D rendering.
-
*stuff*
Um...I own one of those Dell clamshell P4s myself, and it's been my only machine for almost six years now. I've never removed it from the floor in all that time (how the hell am I supposed to fit something like that on a small desk?), and yet I've never had a single overheating issue. The only major hardware issue I've ever had with it was the original hard drive succumbing to the Click o' Doom, but with that replaced and a big RAM upgrade, it's served me well over its lifespan. (*knocks on head*) I'd like to think I can do a bit more than check my e-mail and use Word, too. :p
-
Agreed. Plus they die slowly. We thought we had a hard drive problem in one and it's now gone through both myself and my uncle trying to fix my stepdad's. Random crashes and all, very reminiscent of a bad hard drive... except apparently it's not.
Try memtest86+, then try replacing the PSU.
We've done it all. It just randomly crashes (regardless of load) about once every other month or so.
-
Simultaneous cough-burp-fart
FEEL OFFENDED WHEN YOU FULLY FIT THE CRITERIA OF MY SCENARIO.
I still don't recommend it being on the floor. Having it on the floor in your case doesn't not keep the psu fan from becoming a vacuum cleaner for floor dust. I don't like dealing with dusty computers, so i just don't put them on the floor.
On the floor there's dirt. The floor is where your feet go. The floor is where constant dust and dirt get stirred up into the air because of peoples feet doing something called walking. The floor is where your computer is with fans, and it's sucking up all the nummies :)
You're an outlier because you take care of your computer whereas people in my scenario don't. But, i'd still take your computer off the floor, it is sucking up dust for sure. It's basic computer handling, don't put your computer on or near a dusty floor mat and don't put your computer on the floor. Because having your computer on the floor and you take care of it doesn't mean that it's a good idea to have it on the floor.
-
I spent a summer servicing white box computers that were out on the shop floor, and I mean on the floor. They were full of not only dust but metal and plastic shavings and grease and whatever else was in the air in that area of the factory, and the ones on the floor were consistently the worst. My boss made me relocate the office ones from the floor to the desk too when I swapped them out with new ones. Not that I needed to be told twice, the ones on the floor were filthy inside.
-
FEEL OFFENDED WHEN YOU FULLY FIT THE CRITERIA OF MY SCENARIO.
I still don't recommend it being on the floor. Having it on the floor in your case doesn't not keep the psu fan from becoming a vacuum cleaner for floor dust. I don't like dealing with dusty computers, so i just don't put them on the floor.
Hey man, when you insult my pride(?) and joy(?), even when directed at another party, I have to step in and defend it. :p
But seriously, I literally could not physically put my computer anywhere else but the floor, even if I wanted to. My desk is small and tucked in the corner of my room, and the vast majority of it is dominated by my big-ass 19" CRT monitor. I doubt the desk would take the weight of my monitor and computer combined anyway, even if it was bigger, as it's old and on the rickety side. Hell, even my family's computer downstairs sits on the floor; it's set up at an older dedicated computer desk, but between the widescreen monitor and the huge HP printer/copier/scanner, there's nowhere else it could fit. We don't all have 10-foot-long uber-desks that we can stow a tower or two on, after all.
(And besides all of that, I think my desk is far dustier at the moment than my floor is. :p)
-
Well yeah, I won't deny that the case is a fairly crappy design, but it's managed to work reasonably well for my purposes over these past six years. The only thing that's given out on it are the clamps which snapped down the swing-out USB/headphone port door on the front, which I managed to break when kicking the thing in some fit of rage or other. :p
-
Just "upgraded" from an Athlon XP 1800 to a Pentium D 3.0ghz (single core).
Go ahead, laugh at my obsolescence! :P
:lol:
-
Just "upgraded" from an Athlon XP 1800 to a Pentium D 3.0ghz (single core).
Go ahead, laugh at my obsolescence! :P
:lol:
What? Is this 2006? And how do you have a Pentium D that's single-core?
-
My mistake I was reading the Computer Properties wrong. :nervous:
-
My mistake I was reading the Computer Properties wrong. :nervous:
FYI: You could be correct when saying you have a single-core Pentium D. Either one dead core or the second core is turned off (either by the OS; usually an installation problem or by the BIOS; a simple setting to disable cores). So what is it? A P4? P4-HT? Pentium D/Pentium XE? Or maybe one of the rare PXE-HT's?
-
Well, the Computer Properties States that it is Pentium D 3.0 Ghz (apart from the D there is no indication that it is Dual Core) yet the Device Manager tells me that it has a MPS Multiprocessor.
:shrugs:
-
*stuff*
Um...I own one of those Dell clamshell P4s myself, and it's been my only machine for almost six years now. I've never removed it from the floor in all that time (how the hell am I supposed to fit something like that on a small desk?), and yet I've never had a single overheating issue. The only major hardware issue I've ever had with it was the original hard drive succumbing to the Click o' Doom, but with that replaced and a big RAM upgrade, it's served me well over its lifespan. (*knocks on head*) I'd like to think I can do a bit more than check my e-mail and use Word, too. :p
P4's were very, very hard to overheat. If it get s too hot the clock will slow down. To its credit Intel generally did a better job of paying attention to thermal issues at the time.
-
The CPU itself perhaps, but that doesn't help the rest of the hardware in the box. Yes, Intel chips have historically run cooler than their AMD counterparts. But hard drives, RAM, video cards, etc are all very susceptible to heat issues in such an environment. Good thing those Geforce 3s were so underclocked they weren't at too much risk.
-
The CPU itself perhaps, but that doesn't help the rest of the hardware in the box. Yes, Intel chips have historically run cooler than their AMD counterparts. But hard drives, RAM, video cards, etc are all very susceptible to heat issues in such an environment. Good thing those Geforce 3s were so underclocked they weren't at too much risk.
Actually the P4 could run just as hot as any Athlon at the time given its then high power usage. The difference was the P4 had thermal throtling and the Athlon either had nothing (thunderbird) or a thermal diode that didn't always work. Watch (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nU_rvVEna4) (video made in 2001 by tom's hardware guide). IIRC this video made AMD pay more attention to thermal protection, so starting with Hammer they integrated the thermal throtling feature.
-
Alright, just powered up my mom's old emachines because we were going to try and upgrade the video card, but I found out that the video card isn't the only thing in need of replacement. It has a classic Athlon single core processor, with 2.0 GHz speed.
-
Is it better than Intel 915GL combined with an Intel Celeron D at 2.66 GHz? That's what my IBM crate has. :p
-
Our family's original PC, an almost-15-year-old Gateway 2000 with a whopping 166 MHz Pentium processor and 16 MB of RAM, was lying around until fairly recently. I would have loved to tinker with the thing a bit, but I couldn't get it to output anything to a monitor (I have no idea what sort of video card was in it), so we just ditched it when our county had a hazardous-waste collection day. I miss that huge beige box. :(
-
Our family's original PC, an almost-15-year-old Gateway 2000 with a whopping 166 MHz Pentium processor and 16 MB of RAM, was lying around until fairly recently. I would have loved to tinker with the thing a bit, but I couldn't get it to output anything to a monitor (I have no idea what sort of video card was in it), so we just ditched it when our county had a hazardous-waste collection day. I miss that huge beige box. :(
A PCI graphics card would have probably worked. Then again, probably not even worth paying shipping on.
-
Is it better than Intel 915GL combined with an Intel Celeron D at 2.66 GHz? That's what my IBM crate has. :p
Hell no.
-
Really? Is that Athlon of yours worse than my Celeron? :wtf:
-
I'm pretty sure I just said that. :P
-
Well, the Computer Properties States that it is Pentium D 3.0 Ghz (apart from the D there is no indication that it is Dual Core) yet the Device Manager tells me that it has a MPS Multiprocessor.
:shrugs:
Computer properties in windows doesn't really tell you much about the processor aside from the name and the speed. Go into task manager instead, and if you see more than one processor work load percentage meter, then you know for sure if it's more than one core.
-
Yeah, that was how I finally figured it was dual core, I could set the core affinity through task manager. :yes:
-
I thought affinity was a Professional Edition-only thing. Guess I'm not using common sense there. :D
-
I thought affinity was a Professional Edition-only thing. Guess I'm not using common sense there. :D
I've seen it in all versions of NT5+, iirc.